The AARP & Lobbying -- 33 Million Seniors Have A D.C. Giant, But It's Often Quiet

WASHINGTON - Among membership groups that wield influence in Washington, the American Association of Retired Persons stands alone.

Consider a few facts:

-- AARP has 33 million dues-paying members, making it the second-largest membership organization in the United States. The Roman Catholic Church is first.

-- An estimated one in every five voters belongs to AARP. It has its own political arm, AARP Vote, intent on getting candidates' attention on seniors' issues.

-- Its annual budget is $300 million. It lends its name to eight businesses that have a combined cash flow of an estimated $10 billion a year. They in turn have access to its huge mailing list.

-- AARP's advertising slogan is: "Join the association that's bigger than most countries."

-- It has one of the most sophisticated mass-mailing operations in the country, capable of sending out 5 million pieces of mail a month. It gets so much mail it has its own zip code.

-- Its magazine, Modern Maturity, reaches more than 22 million households, making it the largest circulation monthly in the U.S.

Little wonder then that politicians approach AARP with fawning respect. "AARP is clearly the group every member of Congress fears the most," said National Taxpayers' Union Vice President Paul Hewit, a frequent critic. "It is 10 times larger than other groups that make Congress quake."

Some consider the association almost a shadow government.

Phillip Longman, an expert on aging issues, was fired by a Florida congressman after he criticized AARP on a network TV show. It is, he said, "just beyond the pale for most politicians to consider taking a position that's contrary to AARP's agenda."

Issues such as Medicare and retirement benefits are handled gingerly on Capitol Hill, or not at all. Social Security, said Senate GOP leader Bob Dole, has long been "the unmentionable."

But while no one questions the political influence of the nation's senior citizens, who vote in disproportionately high numbers, the authority of any association to speak for them, let alone to shape their views, may be overstated.

CONSENSUS HARD TO REACH

Beholden to a constituency almost as vast and diverse as that of Congress, some aging experts charge that AARP seems reluctant, or unable, to move with boldness or dispatch beyond the handful of issues on which it has the broadest consensus.

The association has resources other interest groups envy: a Washington staff of 1,000, including 17 registered lobbyists; a respected policy institute to provide comprehensive research; and a five-volume policy agenda.

Yet AARP uses its clout sparingly. "The biggest criticism I have of AARP," said one expert on aging issues, "is that they don't take more chances. They have lobbyists who are more anxious to preserve those relationships on Capitol Hill than they are to use those relationships."

Because it is nonprofit, AARP cannot contribute to political campaigns, and this gives away a great deal of influence, said executive director Horace Deets.

"I really get amused when I hear, `God, you people are so powerful. You are a threat to the country. . . . You are the Darth Vader of politics,' " Deets said. "There are a lot more organizations who have gotten many more things their way because of their political-action committees and their (financial) involvement than we have."

Another reason for AARP's timidity may be the fragile bond it has with many of its members. Millions joined not out of political commitment but to buy cut-rate insurance, to get travel discounts or to receive the magazine, free with $5-a-year dues. The threshold for membership is age 50.

AARP's internal structure owes more to the corporate world than to the political one. Officers are elected from a single slate of candidates. The nominating committee is hand-picked by the headquarters staff, which also influences what issues the organization will pursue.

"There is no democratic process built into the organization because it was a sales operation from the beginning," said Jack Carlson, a former AARP executive director.

STAFF IS LEFT OF SENIORS

While most members tend to be conservative, particularly on fiscal matters, AARP's staff has almost a Great Society devotion to the welfare of senior citizens, often with government help.

"Its process for decision-making involves a highly selective core of social-policy activists who tend to be significantly to the left of their membership," Hewit said.

In 1988, for instance, AARP lobbied for a major expansion of Medicare coverage for catastrophic illness financed by a tax on the more affluent senior population. The backlash against the new law was overwhelming.

A year later, a chastened Congress repealed the whole plan, but not until House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dan Rostenkowski, D-Ill., had been chased down the street by an angry mob of senior citizens who surrounded his car. When AARP's staff continued to support the legislation, furious members resigned en masse.

"I think members of Congress fear AARP a lot less than they did five and 10 years ago because they have seen the limits of its power," said Robert Binstock, a Case Western Reserve University professor and a leading national expert on aging issues.

Last year, when seniors raised a storm over a congressional plan to raise some Medicare premiums, AARP remained silent.

Last fall, some senior citizen groups expressed deep concern over the nomination of Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court, saying he had been antagonistic on age discrimination issues when he headed the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Yet AARP did not launch an effort to defeat his nomination.

"They are reluctant to pull out the troops for something they can't deliver on," said Paul Kerschner, senior vice president of the National Council on Aging and a former AARP staffer.

"Part of their power," Kerschner said, "is they are a slumbering giant and everybody is wary of them."

But with competition increasing for the dwindling resources of the federal budget, some critics have taken aim at senior citizens' lobbies in general and AARP in particular. The elderly, they say, are receiving a disproportionate share of federal spending at the expense of other generations, particularly young children.

Programs for the elderly - mainly Social Security and Medicare - account for almost one-third of the federal budget and nearly half of all domestic spending, excluding payment on the national debt. In the past 20 years, the annual cost of Medicare has soared from $22.5 billion to $118 billion.

Meanwhile, poverty among the elderly has dropped dramatically, from 35.2 percent in 1959 to just over 12 percent - the lowest of any age group. There are more than 500,000 millionaires who receive Social Security.